Don’t Preach a Heterosexual Gospel?

David Burchard Doctrine, Writings 5 Comments

“In one point I do certainly think that Victorian Bowdlerism did pure harm. This is the simple point that, nine times out of ten, the coarse word is the word that condemns an evil and the refined word the word that excuses it.” – G.K. Chesterton

For am I now seeking the favor of men, or of God? Or am I striving to please men? If I were still trying to please men, I would not be a slave of Christ. – Paul of Tarsus


iron crotch

The Revoice Conference has come and gone, but not its lies. I’d naively hoped that Revoice would serve to clarify errors being taught in evangelical circles. I’d hoped that Christians would see the hideous thing, realize that the assumptions behind Revoice are likewise held by the effeminate vicars of Living Out and promoted by TGC, and would conclude, “No más. We’re going back to the old-time religion. We’re going to finally listen to that fundamentalist in Indiana. We’re going to plug the holes in the Nashville Statement that big truckloads of toxic waste keep driving through with each passing convention, conference, book, and blog.”

But, alas, such hopes were naive. Just this week, Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary (the up-and-coming hip younger brother SBC seminary), under the skillful brand management of Jared Wilson, published the rebellious ideas of Revoice on their own platform, supposedly for the church.

The article is so obviously stupid and contrary to God’s Word, that I’m left baffled. The men at MBTS are not stupid men. I’d never be stupid enough to make such a charge. So, what is it? What’s wrong with their willing? What’s wrong with their spines? I know a few chiropractors, if that would help.

First, the article is written by Jackie Hill Perry (it’s an excerpt from her book). She is a she and she is telling the church on “For the Church” what gospel to preach and why.

Right off the bat, Wilson, MBTS, and all the evangelicals within earshot who claim to fight for sound doctrine should have thought, “You know, this shouldn’t get published on this forum.” She is a she. It ain’t her job to publicly pronounce to the church the errors of her preaching and the way she should go. God has left that job to men, men with Bibles and horse sense.

Yes, I hold Jackie accountable for taking the opportunity to speak in such a way. She should obey the Apostle and, “Be quiet.” But this is primarily the fault of those men that let it happen. When men and women join together in sin, the men always bear the greatest responsibility. Those men should be ashamed of themselves.

But, it gets worse.

The title of this article is, “Don’t Preach a Heterosexual Gospel“. If you’ve been taught well, reading this title lets you know that the article is going to be as savory as a full Port-o-John a week after Burning Man. No matter how you read the title, it is a valueless exhortation. If you read it in light of our context, which you should, you will recognize that it is lying.

“Don’t Preach a Heterosexual Gospel” could theoretically be an exhortation to preach the gospel to both homosexuals and folks of the natural variety. Such an exhortation would be without value because everyone involved in this conversation agrees with that premise. We all agree that the gospel should be preached to gay and natural. We disagree on the meaning of repentance and the power of the Holy Spirit.

What Jackie Hill Perry means by, “Don’t Preach a Heterosexual Gospel”, worse than being without value, is just a lie. She means don’t preach a gospel that assumes righteousness requires heterosexuality, natural sex.

Firstly, the gospel is pure promise. This is what Christ has done. Receive and be blessed. But that same gospel that is pure promise of life in Christ then brings with that actual life in Christ. That includes righteous laws to live by, a new heart to desire and love those laws, and new power from the indwelling Holy Spirit to drive obedience and kill remaining sin. Therefore, those who have been declared righteous in justification must and will walk in righteousness, as they travel the narrow road of sanctification. And this righteousness to which Christians will be conformed, a righteousness not just in deed but in desire, unavoidably includes heterosexuality. That’s because God has made us male and female. And so Christians are made righteous males and righteous females.

Duh. And I mean duh in the most grating sense possible. It’s ridiculous that this error still needs to be addressed.

sam allberry gay

Her opening line in the article reads as follows, “God isn’t calling gay people to be straight.
” Again, this is a lie that follows the lie of the title. Yes, God is calling gay people to be straight. What else would he be doing?

Gayness is an abomination to God. He hates when men put their sexual organ into other men’s waste organs. He considers lesbians degrading and indecent. He hates gay desire, when a man or woman looks at another of the same sex and is drawn sexually to that other. He is so against sexual perversion that He won’t even let effeminate men into his kingdom.

He requires repentance, the forsaking of more than sinful action, but also of sinful wants. And repentance is exactly what Christians do. Even in the out-of-line Corinthian church, where they were tolerating incest, Paul can still say, “such were some of you.” No longer effeminate. No longer gay or lesbian. Changed by the grace of God, down to the core. Free indeed. Repentant.

Do Christians still have the flesh? Do they still have indwelling sin? Yes. But Christians don’t point to indwelling sin as an excuse for treating sinful desires as precious and part of their identity. They reject the sin within and choose to conform each day to the demands of God’s Word. Walking as men. Walking as women.

Following her introduction, Jackie Hill Perry makes four points, two of which are included in the published excerpt.

“1. We are more than our sexuality.”

She cites Genesis 1:27, as if it establishes the claim. It doesn’t.

She has two main sub-points that make up this section. Her argumentation is an example of what Dorothy Sayers criticized.

Sub-point one boils down to, “our sexuality may be a part of who we are, but it is not all that we are.” She pads out the paragraph by denying positions nobody holds, but eventually lands at this statement.

The statement is refuted easily by my friend, Joe Bancks:

“So ‘you are more than your sexuality’ is false. You are you, and you are not more than you, and you are a sexual soul. Why does the failure two-time seminary dropout have to say these things?”

godliness is not heterosexuality

“2. Marriage is not the pinnacle of the Christian faith.” Here, she cites Revelation 19:6-9.

She says that man’s chief end is the glory of God. Amen. She says that our eternal life with Christ is the greatest prize. Amen.

What she then wants you to think follows does not follow. It’s all about the glory of God…you get to be with Jesus forever…and, so…marriage is not worth dying for. No matter how she defines her phrase, “marriage is not worth dying for”, you ought to be left scratching your head.

She says that the Christian’s highest calling is not to marriage, but to love God and love neighbor. This is a false dichotomy. Loving God and loving your neighbor are practical commandments. They bring a, “how?” and must be done in an earthy world. And marriage is, in fact, a higher calling than singleness for the carrying out of the two great commandments. I make that case here. That’s how God made the world. It isn’t loving to lie to singles who’ll buy your book by telling them that singleness is as glorious as marriage.

Before you dismiss the case without due consideration, know that Jesus was and is not single. He is betrothed to the woman he came to save. Furthermore, the office of Second and Final Adam is higher than the office of not-Second Adam husband, which is higher than the office of not-Second Adam single. That’s the hierarchy in God’s world.

One final point regarding this rubbish that MBTS and Jared Wilson thought would somehow be beneficial to us all:

Throughout the excerpt, Jackie Hill Perry talks about Same-Sex Attracted Christians/SSA Christians. The Bible NEVER talks that way, so we shouldn’t. And the only reason we do is because we want to be precious with sin. We’d never dream of talking about Pedophile Christians and worrying about disorienting them with our sermons on repentance. We’d never write about Bestial Christians and their hurt feelings when their sexual desires are excluded from righteousness. So, let’s cut it out when it comes to sodomy and those who have perverse, homosexual desires.

Do not trust big, evangelical brands. Those brands, like For the Church and The Gospel Coalition, are not just allowing these errors. They’re promoting them.

Know and trust your Bible. Be a Protestant.

Comments 5

  1. Pingback: Why So…Not Nice? – Creaturely Consideration

  2. Thank you for your boldness in addressing this issue. I often wonder why there aren’t more courageous men saying these things.

    1. Post
      Author

      The shame is that someone like me is writing this article. Men who lead evangelical parachurch organizations built to promote Biblical sexuality will consider me in sin for this article. But the points I make here are basic Christian points.

      On Sun, Sep 23, 2018 at 7:36 PM Creaturely Consideration wrote:

      >

  3. Please don’t become discouraged if anyone says that you are in sin. You’re not. Thank you for speaking so boldly and truthfully. I pray for you and others who are faithful to the truth of God’s Word.

    1. Post
      Author

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *